Geopolitics

In the great battle of Sekigahara, the eastern forces of Tokugawa Ieyasu defeated the western forces of Ishida Mitsunari because the eastern forces had a unified command structure and the west didn’t. 


Better logistics beats better strategy nearly every time.

creating and destroying; built flying cars & autonomous vehicles, now building /faust, more here: /july, web: july.rocks

Former SEC/CFTC/House&Senate staffer. Now Policy@Paradigm. Perennial Optimist.

Too easy to read a simple answer

Ieyasu was also just very good, there were lots of defections even before the battle began, and to go back even further, the Toyotomi legacy/group for which Mitsunaro was fighting didn’t have particularly strong legitimacy given how Hideyoshi originally rose to power

cc @july

History

The battle of sekigahara wasn’t only about logistics imo:
- Kobayakawa had large forces on a hill for half the battle couldn’t decide which side until both sides pretty much not only threatened him but started shooting arrows on his troop well into the battle - he chose the Tokugawa side
- Other defectors like Kikkawa and Akaza late decided the battle as they followed Kobayakawa
- Mitsunari was charismatic and deeply loyal to the Toyotomi side but still had a of issues recruiting lords to fight for him
- Background: Toyotomi Hideyoshi passes away in 1598, and it creates a power vacuum. Ieyasu now in his late 50s is ready to take over (after seeing unification happen first with Nobunaga, and now with Hideyoshi, there’s finally an opportunity for him) but Hideyoshi’s son and his mother are in the way. This was the literal and metaphorical battle between the incumbent and the challenger 
- So every daimyo in Japan has a choice, stick w/ the old Toyotomi, or fight for the Ieyasu, or abstain. It was a bet

Be specific.     

leonasskau.co.uk //
Hosting /strategy, /leo, /geopolitics // built Culture3.com // online: leosn.xyz
d33m:mun